| XBK Chat (unofficial archive) A meeting place for past members of Brahma Kumaris
FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups
Profile You have no new messages Log out
The "detachment" paradox
| XBK Chat Forum Index -> XBK discussions
View previous topic :: View next topic
Author | Message
--- | ---
Atma Joined: 26 Feb 2004 Posts: 98 |
Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2004 5:58 pm Post subject: The "detachment" paradox |
A paradox is basically a contradiction; usually in a statement, but it can also be in a situation, practice or belief system. In the context of the BKs, there is what I would term the "detachment paradox". The BKs list attachment as one of the five vices. And they say that its opposite, detachment, is a virtue to be cultivated. In the BK path, there is a lot of emphasis on service, shrimat and gyan. Many people get so caught up in the philosophy and the future-oriented belief system that they lose sight of the situation or realities "on the ground". What am I getting at? Leaving aside the abstract belief concepts, the Brahma Kumaris is an organization made up of people - human beings. It has a structure and a hierarchy. We can think of it as a pyramid but, for the purposes of this post, a set of concentric circles is a better image and will make my meaning clearer. Those in the innermost, or central, circle would be the seniors, many of whom were there from the beginning or very early days of the movement. Indeed, some of them would have been in the group during the 14 years of seclusion. Today, they are the movers and shakers in the movement. The point is this: from the very beginning, to the present time, these folks in the inner circles have constantly been in the company of each other and are, presumably, like minded individuals. They meditate together, do service together, eat together and celebrate together. The frequently talk, plan and discuss together. Even those sisters posted abroad are in constant touch with their fellow sisters, not to mention the other BKs who reside in the centers and the students who attend class. They also regularly make trips back to India and Abu, paid for by donation money. There is recognition of the happiness that this company can bring. Indeed, those who experience it are regarded as more fortunate - and more valuable. This has sometimes been expressed this way: "Better to be a bead of the rosary than a single bead." Again, the point I am making is that, in this scenario, it is totally meaningless to speak of detachment. In other words, when people are constantly surrounded by and interacting with their peers, there is no test –or price - of detachment. To claim "detachment" in those circumstances is cost free. And the closer your circle is to the central circle, the more company you have. Those based in Abu, which is, in terms of geography and hierachy, the innermost circle, ironically have the most company. I say "ironically" because it is in Abu that the fire of tapasya should be burning hottest. Contrast this to those souls in the outer rings of the concentric circles. Many of them are physically alone, and consequently suffer isolation and loneliness. Yes, they can go to the center to attend classes and experience "sat sangh" but that's for an hour or two, and then it's back to the harsh realities of everyday "worldly" life. Meanwhile, the sisters remain cozily cocooned in the centers, in the company of their companions. Many of them, if left alone, would be like a fish out of water. Yet they expect those on the outer edges to be sustained simply on faith in the knowledge and the "source". It’s easy to tell someone to live like that when you are not in their shoes. Worse yet if the person is married and the spouse is not in gyan. It can be a living hell. Those on the fringes don’t have the luxury of constant company of like minded souls, and so they pay a heavy price for their “detachment”. That price is compounded by the burden of maintaining impossibly high “spiritual” standards while, at the same time, discharging their duties in a very worldly and competitive environment. An environment that couldn’t care two hoots about the BK lifestyle and “principles”. This is a significant challenge that the center wasis simply do not have to face. On a lighter note, I heard, reliably, that at a certain foreign center –let’s just say somewhere outside of India - the center building is believed to be haunted and neither of the two principal BKs will ever stay there alone! They are terrified to be alone with the ghosts. One would have thought that the "powerful" daily meditation would have banished the wandering spirits and the sisters would have become fearless (and detached) tigresses of God. Instead, one of these "surrendered and detached" sisters visits her lokik family every week. I tell you, life can be amusing. _________________________________________________ This post is somewhat related to my other post on "The need to belong". However, in my view, given its importance, it deserves to be dealt with as a separate topic.
kyra Joined: 19 Apr 2004 Posts: 66 |
Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2004 9:32 pm Post subject: Re: The "detachment" paradox |
Atma wrote:
Contrast this to those souls in the outer rings of the concentric circles. Many of them are physically alone, and consequently suffer isolation and loneliness. Yes, they can go to the center to attend classes and experience "sat sangh" but that's for an hour or two, and then it's back to the harsh realities of everyday "worldly" life.
This was my experience and why I found it difficult to sustain a BK life.
Guest |
Posted: Thu Jul 29, 2004 10:13 pm Post subject: |
Om shanti! Because the internet is so global so I am not sure if many can relate but here I go. While growing up there is a simple yet profound message in a nursery ryhme and it goes like this. Row Row Row your boat Gently down the stream Merrily Merrily Merrily life is but a dream. Before this knowledge I would try to remind myself to row my boat not someone elses. Take Care,
Paul Joined: 13 Mar 2004 Posts: 72 |
Posted: Fri Jul 30, 2004 5:51 am Post subject: |
No Papaya, That's not profound. It's lame. Very lame. Its also symtomatic of the tendency of Eastern - or Eastern influenced - minds to dodge hard issues by resorting to "the mystical".
isabel Joined: 24 Mar 2004 Posts: 39 |
Posted: Fri Jul 30, 2004 10:19 am Post subject: |
Excellent, excellent point, Atma. I second Kyra as well, pursuing detachment did not make me a happy camper. No doubt had I started raja yoga while living in relative isolation with a large group of gals my age I would have felt differently about many things. One of the things that disturbed me a great deal while I was a BK was experiencing the death of a close family member and thinking, what would happen to me if I fell ill on this spiritual path? Who can be meditative while racked by pain or high on medication? If someone isn't married, doesn't have children, is dutifully 'detached', who will take care of them when they fall ill? Naturally if one is 'cocooned' in Maduban or part of an extended family network in India this is hardly a worry. My relationship with my center, and those of the other BKs , was so distant that I could hardly image them doing more than dropping by for a few visits. Seems like sort of a precarious way to live life...
Guest |
Posted: Fri Jul 30, 2004 3:30 pm Post subject: |
I feel the most difficult thing in live is to get things in balance. I always tend to do something to much or to little. The moments when it's just in balance are mostly short. I'd say detachment is good, but living without attachment not. That's where most bk's got it all wrong. And experience can help you get things balanced out in your life. But without an open mind that enables you to gain wisdom (not mere knowledge), there is not much benefit in all those experiences.
hanuman Joined: 23 Jun 2004 Posts: 174 |
Posted: Tue Aug 03, 2004 1:57 am Post subject: The Detachment Paradox |
This was a paradox in the BK ethos that I learned to deal with almost from day one in gyan. I learned not to renounce my lokik friends and family members. I realized that help for one rationale of shrimath or another, would not be there as I expect it. No Raj yogi develops in SB's company in vaccuo. There is the interaction with members of the Brahmin family and that of lokik friends and family members. In my early days of gyan in Guyana, there was a core of gyani intellectual radicals who came into gyan around the same time and established a great support system similar to the Knights of the Round Table. There was Brother Richard Kanhai a radical Hindu scholar, Raymond who was completing studies at the University of the West Indies, Walter (Wally) a computer technologist who became an anti-technology advocate, Krishna Narine who was a high school mate of mine and there was me. I recall that after Sunday morning classes, I and several brothers would visit the home of Brother Richard and have extensive discussions on the wisdom of gyan. Brother Richard also had an extensive library of Oriental philosophy. I think that the fellowship with that core of individuals was as significant as listening the the murli with other Raj yogis. In the US, though I was in Alabama and in a small center, there was abundant support from the other centers in the US and even from London and Madhuban. I felt as though Baap-Dada was supporting me through my academic studies to become a veterinarian. There was genuine moral support and spiritual support from the BKs in other centers in the US. However, a Raj Yogi should always maintain good relationships with his/her lokiks and not reject them. Friends should also not be rejected because they are non-gyani. _________________ Om Shanti, To my brothers and sisters. Love to you all, Errol bhai
hanuman Joined: 23 Jun 2004 Posts: 174 |
Posted: Tue Aug 03, 2004 2:09 am Post subject: The Paradox of detachment |
Please forfive me. There were also very great sisters in Guyana who were also part of the fellowship. There was Sister Sinide a great singer, Sister Simi whose lokik husband was a famous OBGYN specialist, Sister Amruta and Sister Shanta, BK Gyatri, BK Chandra, BK Sita and BK Christine. I could not have grown without the fellowship demonstrated by such souls who at that time established a fine balance between being humanistic and detached. _________________ Om Shanti, To my brothers and sisters. Love to you all, Errol bhai
Jim Joined: 16 Aug 2004 Posts: 9 Location: UK |
Posted: Tue Aug 17, 2004 5:35 am Post subject: |
The description Atma has given of "detachment" would probably find acceptance amongst most Bks. It results is disconnection from other people. Removing oneself from "bad company" is a yukti (I know it's not taught as such) - it's not primarliy a teaching about detachment, but is to protect the new BK from non BKinfluence - like a sapling needs time before it can face a strong wind. Similarly people who take up network marketing / pyramid selling used to be told not to discuss it with anyone at first (because they wouldn't be able to hold their end up in an arguement and would lose faith in the ideas / their intellect). I find the most helpful explanation of attachment (by Ram Dass) is that if you are dependent on something (for happiness etc) then your are attached. So being detached from someone doesn't at all mean you treat them as if they don't exist - it means you don't take your happiness from them. Or at least that's my take on it. Jim
hanuman Joined: 23 Jun 2004 Posts: 174 |
Posted: Wed Aug 18, 2004 2:21 am Post subject: The Detachment Paradox |
Jim, Your definition is humanistic. However, even though solitude has a premium in the lokik and alokik communities, there can be a great sociological fallout, if a yogi completely neglects lokik relationship. _________________ Om Shanti, To my brothers and sisters. Love to you all, Errol bhai
Display posts from previous:
| XBK Chat Forum Index -> XBK discussions | All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1
| You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group